Anniversary of Babri Mosque Demolition Today

[pagans]

The question is about the Killings followed by foolish idea of fanatics from your country which is even not based on truth as you yourself said it is not even established if it was a birth place of ram or not.

The killing were started by Muslims not Hindus, No single Muslim was killed by Hindus during the demolition.

 

[rajeev]

The question is about the Killings followed by foolish idea of fanatics from your country which is even not based on truth as you yourself said it is not even established if it was a birth place of ram or not.

and i agree with you that this extremism is only costing a nation building.

It is a fact that Ram temple existed which was replaced by a Mosque by Mughals. But most Indians dont think that justifies moving the mosque as it make no sense. No one can give justice if they keep on looking back and back into history.

The thing I hate about this government they are not crucifying the ring leaders that were responsible for the incident. But the incident in itself has made sure BJP wont see any government office until a long time. BJP has lost its charm. Shiv Sena cant seem to get a seat and neither MNS has any influence. Indians seem to have grown out of this stupidity and working hard to enjoy their life - thanks to the economy.

Religion appears to be root of all evil.

 

[rajeev]

Poor children in India, if lucky enough to get past five, something else

will be waiting for them......in order to survive.

And yes, in China they are thrown behind bars if they published anything other than "Chinese statistics".

 

[Moorkh]

How many Hindu temples has the RSS blown like Taliban did ti mosques.
RSS in no way equals Taliban.
RSS is more secular than PPP of Pakistan.

the point here is that RSS on the whole has a very very communal rhetoric almost all the time. it is too closely related to the VHP. it might not say much in front of the media but i have never come across a RSS member without an anti muslim bias. and trust me i have come across a lot of them.

 

[Iggy]

If you noticed i am using the word Hindu Fanatics not Hindus.

Indeed those who razed the babri Mosque and killed thousands of Muslims are Hindu Fanatics and not all Hindus.

And no You can not kill your own citizens for any insurgency be it Islamic or Hindu, going on in a third or other country.

Which Islamic insurgency is going on in India for which you blame the killing of Muslims in India by Fanatic Hindus??

The Gujrat Killings, The Babri Mosque incident followed by Killings, The Orissa Killings all these were due to religion my dear so you should look into the factor where Fanatic Hindu organisations are on a killing spree which is only damaging Indian image and doing no good.

Jana I noticed many time you and many others delibarately using words like fanatics when addressing Hindus..Yes Muslims were killed by fanatics in some places and yes its a permanent scar to the image of secular India..but you also should know that minorities live not only in Gujrat and Orissa but in whole India..when Gujrat was burned in religious riot why other places didnt join it??Hindus are majority is almost all states in India..Then why minorites are not murdered nor a religious riot in any other place in India when Gujrat riot was happening??

And also we have to look at some of the actions of minorities when a riot happens..belive me when i am saying...we are not that saint as you think..I will give you a small sample of minorities action..its a link of you tube of a priest speech..Unfortunately its in Malayalam..I will give you a short note of what he is saying..

He is saying that Indian Flag contains three colors. Meroon represent Hindu,White represent Christian and Green represent Muslims..And Ashoka Chakra is in White color of the flag ..Asok means with out sorrow ie peace..So in order to attain peace both muslims and hindus should come to Christianity..

Imagine these kind of speech in an Islamic country??Do you think he will live for one sec after that??Still he preach like this in this country and most of the Hindus dont care ..But when we preach like this in a backward areas of Orissa some problems will occur

 

[Halaku Khan]

A few points:

1. The fact that a temple existed at the precise spot on which the Babri Masjid stood is now archeologically established beyond reasonable doubt. In fact, Babri Masjid used to be called "Masjid-e-Janmasthan" previously. See posts in the sticky Babri Masjid thread.

2. There were thousands of similar instances of temples being demolished and replaced by Masjids.

3. Two significant such temples are the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura, and the Kashi Vishwanath temple in Benaras, both of which were demolished by Aurangazeb. Masjids now stand in their places. There is absolutely no historical controversy about all this. After the Marathas conquered those areas, they financed the construction of Hindu temples adjacent to the original holy sites. The original holy sites remain occupied by Masjids.

4. The mafia of leftist historians needs to be kicked out and an unvarnished view of history needs to be taught in the text-books.

5. There are indications that the domes of Babri Masjid were demolished not by the BJP or the RSS, but by paid infiltrators, possibly sent by the Congress party. The thick walls were demolished by agents after the BJP state govt in UP was dismissed. The people who carried out the demolition need to be punished.

6. All incidents of rioting need to be severely punished. Note that in many instances it was aggrieved Muslims who came out on the streets to riot.

7. This dispute should be settled through amicable consultations amongst people of all communities, keeping in view the history of the site.

 

[Spring Onion]

The killing were started by Muslims not Hindus, No single Muslim was killed by Hindus during the demolition.

You always surprise me by such lies. The riots were followed by demolition where Muslims were killed by fanatic hindu mob

 

[pagans]

You always surprise me by such lies. The riots were followed by demolition where Muslims were killed by fanatic hindu mob

What I said is true. Check it out.

No Muslim was killed by the karsevaks at Ayodhya that fatefull day.

Riots started all over India when Muslims learned that cowardly Kaffir Hindus dared to destroy Masjid E Janmasanthan( and Of course Babur was a honorable man).

Muslims started the riots, not Hindus.

 

[Nemesis]

A few points:

1. The fact that a temple existed at the precise spot on which the Babri Masjid stood is now archeologically established beyond reasonable doubt. In fact, Babri Masjid used to be called "Masjid-e-Janmasthan" previously. See posts in the sticky Babri Masjid thread.

Irrelevant.

2. There were thousands of similar instances of temples being demolished and replaced by Masjids.

Agreed. But also irrelevant. Hindu rulers also destroyed Buddhist shrines to make temples, should buddhists start a yatra to rebuild them?

3. Two significant such temples are the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura, and the Kashi Vishwanath temple in Benaras, both of which were demolished by Aurangazeb. Masjids now stand in their places.

Can't speak about Varanasi. But yes a mosque is present in Mathura, but there is also a huge complex containing a temple right next to it.

There is absolutely no historical controversy about all this. After the Marathas conquered those areas, they financed the construction of Hindu temples adjacent to the original holy sites. The original holy sites remain occupied by Masjids.

Forgive me if i sound like a tape recorder but also Irrelevant.

4. The mafia of leftist historians needs to be kicked out and an unvarnished view of history needs to be taught in the text-books.

The only people that need to be kicked out are Saffronist historians. These people have no knowledge of history.

5. There are indications that the domes were demolished not by the BJP or the RSS, but by paid infiltrators, possibly sent by the Congress party.

"Ek Dhaka aur do, babri masjid tor do" was a slogan of the RSS/VHP/BJP not the congress.

The thick walls of Babri masjid were demolished by agents after Governor's rule was declared in UP. The people who carried out the demolition need to be punished.

kar sevaks of the VHP you mean? certainly they need to be punished.

6. All incidents of rioting need to be severely punished. Note that in many instances it was aggrieved Muslims who came out on the streets to riot.

Yes, all people who rioted, whether Hindu or Muslim need to be punished.

7. This dispute should be settled through amicable consultations amongst people of all communities, keeping in view the history of the site.

The BJP says it will agree to the supreme court ruling, but then wasn't it Advani who said that Law and History didn't matter in matters of faith? The BJP and its supporters cannot be taken at face value.

What needs to be constructed at the site is a memorial to the victims of the riots.

 

[hindesi]

i totally disagree. this talk about hindu dignity and history is horse dung. you cant go about correcting history's wrongs unless it is adversely affecting how people live in the present. by that logic you should go and raid afganistan because many invaders came from there and demolished temples. go pay them in kind. go across the khyber pass and destroy some temples. or better still go to england and try to take over because they ruled us and subjugated us for so long. where does your dignity go in those cases? and i dont even see you destroying the qutub minar which you have mentioned.

Hey whats wrong with claiming ones history back from ruins, I clearly mentioned that BMD was bad, things should have been solved by talking and discussions. And btw you saying get back at brits huh.. I didn't see them destroying any temples or places of worship.. And it's not just about a temple.. It's about muslim mindset as well, they still live in the glory days of ruling over us and this applies to all muslims in the subcontinent, more or less all of them think on the same lines. And as far as destroying Qutub is concerned well Ram was not born in delhi was he? .. Krishna was not born in delhi was he?? Im not saying get each and every temple back which were destroyed by Islamic morons. But yes certainly the ones which are of great significance for Hindus. And I don't need to go to Afghan to fight them, they're doing it themselves and so are Pakistanis. I'm just enjoying the show mate. What you sow is what you reap and that has been proved decisively in the case of Afghans and Pakistanis.

accept it,
1)it was a political move by the RSS/BJP(i havnt read much of the liberhan report yet so mentioning BJP too) to garner support. it was never to avenge the demolition of a temple which at the time was not proven to exist.

Yes it was but the real problem can not be brushed under the carpet and the people who believe cannot just sit back, they'll try and take back what was taken from them. And dude just read the links i gave you the proof of the temple was there all along.

2)nothing good is going to come out by building a temple there. something of true practical importance is much better. something like a kendriya vidyalaya or a hospitral.

See if you don't care or go to temple does not mean that others don't.. so please save us with your liberal BS ok? .. Temple matters for millions if not YOU so time to stop being self-centered biyatch alright buddy?

Ayodhya, Mathura, Kashi are important to hindus just like Mecca is for Muslims and vatican for christians. Can you even think of a possibility where they would show there "secular" self if hindus wanted to make a temple there? the answer is obvious mate.

And yes something on the lines of hospital/school etc is sensible thing to built there but only after a temple is built (without more bloodshed and killings). Lets talk about the facts and let ask the government to come clean but you know what.. Congress would never do it cause they thrive on muslim votebank. It's in their interest not to put an end to this controversy.

carbon dating of the pillars? please dont make a fool of yourself. carbon dating is done only for organic substances which are derived from living organisms. most commonly wood. now were those 11th century pillars made of wood?
please go and read up on carbon dating.

Fine "carbon dating" does not apply in this case my bad (I feel ashamed for suggesting it), but you know what I mean the pillars were dated to belong to that period!!! you don't have to rub it in for a silly mistake Sir.

I know you won't read the links so let me hlep you here a bit to bring you out of this mental closet you are in..

excerpts from the article.

The Ayodhya Evidence Debate
The Ayodhya Evidence Debate

9. Archaeological Evidence

The only serious comment on the VHP evidence bundle published in the national press (but still not reporting the outcome of the evidence debate) was a derogatory piece by Bhupendra Yadav in The Tribune. In his despair at finding that "proven secularists", like R. Nath and B. B. Lal, "are now nodding assent to the argument for Ram Janmabhoomi", Yadav does try to propose an alternative to the temple destruction scenario. Acknowledging Lal's archaeological finding of 11th century temple foundations underneath the Babri Masjid, he comes up with the following explanation: "After they occupied Ayodhya in 1194 AD, the Turkish sultans found a vacant mound at Ramkot in which lay buried the burnt pillar bases. The sultans encouraged settlements of Muslims on the mound (*) To help these Muslims pray, officials of the Babar regime built a mosque in 1528 AD."[50]

Bhupendra Yadav's nice little scenario is of course purely hypothetical and unsupported by any document whatsoever, but that doesn't seem to trouble him. At any rate, after the cream of India's secularist historians have used all their resources to create a semblance of credibility for the no-temple case, all that Bhupendra Yadav can come up with, is the hypothesis that: 1) The Hindus of Ayodhya had left the geographical place of honor in the middle of their city "vacant", unlike the people of every other city in the whole world; 2) they had laid the foundations (the pillar bases of burnt brick) for a pillared building which they never constructed, and waited for others to come and put these foundations to proper use. This hypothesis is pretty far-fetched. But at least Mr. Yadav has the merit of explicitating what most people who deny the temple destruction scenario only claim by implication.

A similar howler was launched by archaeologist D. Mandal of Allahabad University in his booklet Ayodhya Archaeology after Demolition (1993). In the first week of July 1992, a team of eight reputed archaeologists, including former ASI directors Dr. Y. D. Sharma and Dr. K. M. Srivastava, had paid a visit to the Ramkot hill in Ayodhya. They went there to verify and evaluate the findings done by labourers who had been clearing the area around the Babri Masjid on orders of the Uttar Pradesh Department of Tourism. The findings included religious sculptures, among them a statue of Vishnu (of whom Rama is considered an incarnation), and a lot of Masjid structure. Team members said that the inner boundary of the disputed structure rests, at least on one side, on an earlier temple".[51] They pleaded for a more systematic survey of the entire hill.


However, Mandal dismisses the post-demolition (and pre-demolition)[52] archaeological evidence for the temple as they "cannot be placed in context since the stratigraphical evidence is destroyed by arbitrary digging or wilful destruction".[53] By that criterion, much of Egyptian and Harappan history should also be nullified retro-actively. Even a few decades ago, archaeological methods were unscientific by present-day standards, and the older findings were therefore not as transparent in terms of stratigraphy and chronology as desirable, yet the artifacts found were still real and did not allow for certain conclusions even if less compelling or precise.

Moreover, Mandal seems to be trying to over-awe the lay reader with a distinction between strata which is very important in digging at prehistorical sites but becomes far less crucial in more recent sites, where the objects found are known "in context" because a lot of written evidence attests to their use and meaning and chronology. When you find different prehistoric stone tools, proper stratigraphy is essential if you want to know their chronological sequence. But when you find (a) a paleolithic flintstone scraper, (b) a medieval metal saw, and (c) a modern electrical sawing machine, you can safely deduce that (a) precedes (b) which in turn precedes (c), even if the stratigraphy of the site had been messed up. Likewise, it is not difficult to distinguish Hindu art from Muslim art. It would be a Martial who knows neither religion, but not for us who are familiar with both religions and their art histories.

Unlike findings at pre-literate sits from unknown cultures, the objects in Ayodhya were certainly found "in context". For starters, they were Hindu objects found at a site where, after centuries of Hindu presence, a mosque had been built. Even if stratigraphically less than perfect, the fact of this multifarious evidence's existence, certified a number of leading archaeologists, is undeniable.

Mandal also tries to impose a contrived explanation on Prof. B. B. Lal's old pillar bases evidence, claiming that these pillar-bases were "certainly not contemporaneous with one another" nor even "components of a single structure".[54] This would mean that every now and then, these inconsistent Hindus or Muslims just made a hole in the ground, arbitrarily planted a pillar-base somewhere, never to build a pillar on it, then forgot about it a few decades later, another joker repeated this meaningless ritual, coicindentally yielding an orderly pattern of pillar-bases. This is secularist archaeology for you.

Another strange line of argument which Mandal uses, is this: he first claims that a demolition must have involved the use of fire, then notes that "neither are there traces of burning, expected when military destruction occurs".[55] Now, apart from the fact that fire would mostly affect the overground parts while we are only left with the underground remainder, the point is that no one insists that the temple was destroyed by fire. Numerous mosques stand on Hindu temples which were demolished alright without being burnt down. Indeed, any Kar Sevak would have told Prof. Mandal that there are other ways of demolishing a building. Could it be that Mandal is only refuting his own straw-man hypothesis because he cannot face the real evidence?

For the rest, he repeats the worn-out trick of using the non-mentioning of certain facts in B. B. Lal's brief (i.e., by definition incomplete) report to "contradict" B. B. Lal's and S. P. Gupta's recent revelations of findings which would only appear in the full report.[56] The fact of the matter is that the full report of B. B. Lal's findings was withheld from publication, and that the brief report which the journalists had seen explicity refrains from giving details of the medieval findings. It is quite odd to use the brief version of the report to disprove the detailed version of the same report's relevant part which B. B. Lal himself had just made public.[57]

That the full report is still unpublished, is most likely because the secularist authorities objected to its findings. As Peter Van der Veer reported: "However, in this case the government has not allowed the Department of Archaeology to provide evidence. It has thus fallen to B. B. Lal to do so."[58]

The same counts for the inscription found during the demolition, which clearly mentions that the site was considered Rama's birthplace.[59] At that time, many academics declared without any examination that the inscription, presented by scholars of no lesser stature than themselves, was a forgery. Thus according to "a group of historians and scholars" including Kapil Kumar, B. D. Chattopadhyaya, K. M. Shrimali, Suvira Jaiswal and S. C. Sharma, the "so-called discoveries of artifacts" during and after the demolition were "a planned fabrication and a fraud perpetrated to further fundamentalist designs".[60]

If the secularists had really believe this, theory would have requested access to the findings, which would readily have been granted by the minister in charge, the militant secularist Arjun Singh. They would have invited international scholars as witnesses, and curtly demonstrated its falseness for all to see. Instead, just like B. B. Lal's report, this inscription became a skeleton in their closet, which they have to keep from public view as long as possible.

In fact, the BMAC and secularist tide has frequently opposed archaeological research at the site, while the Hindu side wanted more of it, e.g.: "Nevertheless, in a BBC interview in 1991, [B. B.] Lal argued that there had been a Hindu temple for Rama/Vishnu on the spot now occupied by the mosque and that pillars of that temple had been used in constructing the [Masjid]. Lal suggested that further digging should be carried out in order to come up with more evidence - a suggestion that was denounced in the press by the historian Irfan Habib and others as a ploy to demolish the mosque."[61]

The whole anti-temple argumentation has nothing more to offer than such pitiable attempts to wriggle out from under the weight of inconvenient evidence. Only media power has so far saved the "eminent historians" and their ilk from being exposed.

 

[Halaku Khan]

Irrelevant ...

We're not particularly interested in what you consider to be relevant or otherwise.

As regards the actual events of the day you can begin to expand your knowledge by reading this: Liberhan: 17 years and few surprises : India : M J Akbar : TOI Blogs

You have a lot more to learn but that will do to start with.

 

[Spring Onion]

BJP cannot rake up Ram Janmabhoomi campaign again: Shourie
PTI 6 December 2009, 05:00pm IST

NEW DELHI: BJP's Rajya Sabha MP Arun Shourie, who had launched a broadside against leadership of his party after its Lok Sabha poll debacle, appears to suggest that BJP cannot whip up the Ram Janmabhoomi campaign again.



"You can't fire a bullet twice. The time has passed. Today the issue is delivery," he said.

On criticism within sections of the BJP who feel that the Ram Janmabhoomi movement was now resembling a noose around the party leadership's neck, Shourie said, "That's bunk...I myself was a strong supporter of the Ayodhya movement because one of the principle corrections that was required to Indian public discourse since independence was on the perversion of the meaning of the word secular.

"And the movement, which got personified by Mr (L K) Advani, was a very strong corrective in that regard," he told a news channel.

On the eve of the debate in Parliament on the Liberhan Commission report on Babri mosque demolition, Shourie said, "It is an idiotic report...17 years of public money should have been wasted on this gentleman and his staff! It is a crime".

He said, "It has the most elementary errors. I went through the report and there are so many howlers in it, like the kar sewaks cannot be identified but they were this, that... you can't identify them, (but) you know their character."

Shourie parried a question on his earlier criticism of the party that it was resembling a 'kati patang' (A kite without a string).

"I was allowed that freedom to raise my points. I had my say. It's for the party to see whatever they want to do," he said.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ign-again-Shourie/articleshow/5307905.cms]BJP cannot rake up Ram Janmabhoomi campaign again: Shourie - India - The Times of India

 

[Nemesis]

TOI? i have better things to do than read that rag of a paper. Either answer what i stated or move on.

 

[pagans]

Irelevant

What is 'irrelevant ' to you can be relevant in to others,and more importantly really relevant ! .

 

[pagans]

Delayed economic reform killed 14.5 mn children : India : S A Aiyar : TOI Blogs